I deny both your premises. The apostle simply orders, that each one of the Corinthian brethren should lay up _at home_ some portion of his weekly gains on the first day of the week. The whole question turns upon the meaning of the expression, "by him;" and I marvel greatly how you can imagine that it means "in the collection box of the congregation." Greenfield, in his Lexicon, translates the Greek term, "_by one's self, i. e. at home_." Two Latin versions, the Vulgate and that of Castellio, render it, "_apud se_," with one's self, at home. Three French translations, those of Martin, Osterwald, and De Sacy, "_chez soi_," at his own house, at home. The German of Luther, "_bei sich selbst_," by himself, at home. The Dutch, "_by hemselven_," same as the German. The Italian of Diodati "_appresso di se_," in his own presence, at home. The Spanish of Felipe Scio, "_en su casa_," in his own house. The Portuguese of Ferreira, "_para isso_," with himself. The Swedish, "_nær sig sielf_," near himself. I know not how much this list of authorities might be swelled, for I have not examined one translation that differs from those quoted above. Now, if your premises are false, your inference is not only _unnecessary_, but wholly inadmissible. YOUR SEVENTH PROOF. Revelations 1:10--"I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." You premise, that the "Lord's day" is the first day of the week. Whence you infer, that the first day of the week is the Sabbath. You here assume the principal point in dispute, namely, that God has appointed the first day of every week to be kept in commemoration of the resurrection of Christ. Is every Friday the "Lord's day," because he was crucified on Friday? You answer, No. Is every Thursday the "Lord's day," because he ascended on Thursday? You answer, No. So, when you ask, Is every first day of the week the "Lord's day," because he rose on the first day? I answer, No. And is it too much that I should ask you to prove your assumption? I have never yet met with an attempt to prove it. But, were this even proved, your inference would not be _necessary_. The first day _might_ be the "Lord's day," and yet not the Sabbath. Would the bare mention of this day by the Apostle John, even if it were certain that he referred to the first day of the week, repeal or alter the fourth commandment? Certainly not. But you ask, What day did he mean? I reply, Most probably he meant the seventh, since we know from several scriptures that this _is in fact the Lord's day_. See Nehemiah 9:14, and Isaiah 58:13. But you ask again, Why did he not say "the Sabbath," if he meant it? I reply by asking you, Why did he not say "the first day," if he meant it?